Phone Jammers And Masked Commandos: Inside Zohran Mamdani's High-Security Wedding In Uganda
Over 20 special forces commandos and a phone jammer were deployed at NYC mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani's family estate in Kampala during his three-day wedding
New York City mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani recently marked his wedding with a lavish, three-day celebration at his family's sprawling estate in Uganda, featuring military-style security, a phone-jamming system, and tightly controlled access, The New York Post reported.
The event took place at the Mamdani family's luxury compound in the upscale Buziga Hill area on the outskirts of Kampala. The estate, spread over two acres, features lush gardens, panoramic views of Lake Victoria, and is protected by at least three security gates. The neighbourhood is home to some of Uganda's wealthiest, including billionaire businessman Godfrey Kirumira. Houses nearby are valued at over $1 million.
Mamdani, 33, married Syrian-born artist and animator Rama Duwaji, 27, earlier this year. The celebration followed multiple earlier ceremonies — an engagement and wedding in Dubai in December, followed by a civil ceremony in New York. Mamdani and Duwaji met on the dating app Hinge and now live together in a rent-stabilised apartment in Astoria.
The Uganda celebration, which Mamdani had announced on Instagram, was attended by guests arriving in buses, several Mercedes-Benz cars, and a Range Rover. The estate was decked with Christmas lights strung across tree canopies. Fruit juice stations and a local DJ added to the celebratory atmosphere. One night, Mamdani was heard addressing guests over a microphone, with the party going on until after midnight.
Security at the event was described as unusually tight, even by VIP standards. Over 20 special forces command unit guards, some in masks, were deployed around the property. A phone-jamming system was also in place to prevent leaks. 'Outside the Mamdani house were more than 20 special forces command unit guards, some in masks, and there was a phone-jamming system set up — and all for the strictly invite-only Mamdani event," a witness told The Post. 'One gate had around nine guards stationed at it."
By Friday, military-style tents were being dismantled, and Mamdani's private security resumed gate duty. 'Flowers were also left in a pile on the ground near one of the security gates," The Post noted.
Mamdani had shared on Instagram that he was heading to his homeland to celebrate with his filmmaker mother Mira Nair and academic father Mahmood Mamdani.
While the festivities continued, the neighbourhood was in mourning following the death of former Ugandan Supreme Court Judge George Kanyeihamba, who lived nearby and passed away on July 14. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni visited the area to pay his respects, briefly blocking the street with his motorcade.
The timing of Mamdani's event drew criticism from some residents who considered it culturally insensitive during a period of mourning, locally known as Okukungubaga. 'He has not even been buried, and we have his friends coming to give last words and to mourn before the burial next week, yet Mamdani is celebrating his wedding for three days," one resident told The New York Post. Another added, 'Because of the culture here, it was insensitive to have a wedding celebration in the same week as mourning."
Despite the high-profile nature of the event, it remained largely under the radar for many locals.
He would remain in Uganda until the end of the month.
Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from geopolitics to diplomacy and global trends. Stay informed with the latest world news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
12 hours ago
- Mint
'Home Alone' vibes? Spanish couple ditches 10-year-old at airport, leaves for vacation. Here's what happened
In a bizarre incident at a Spanish airport, an unnamed couple allegedly left their 10-year-old son behind and boarded a flight for their vacation – a scene straight out of Home Alone, according to a report by The New York Post. After reaching the airport, the couple realized that they didn't have the required travel documents for their kid so they decided to leave him behind at the airport terminal and continue with their vacation plans, said the media report. The incident was reported in a TikTok video by a woman, Lilian, an air-operations coordinator at the unidentified airport. She described the incident as "completely surreal". However, her claims could not be verified. According to the New York Post report, Lilian said in Spanish in the clip, '[The kid] told [police] that his parents were on the plane, on their way to their home country for vacation.' 'The explanation given to [the authorities] was that the child was traveling with an expired passport from Spain, and needed a travel visa.' 'Since he didn't have a visa, they left the kid in the terminal and called a relative to pick him up.' 'I didn't see it as normal.' 'The police didn't see it as normal either.' According to Lilian, the police were informed and the parents' luggage was removed from the plane. The couple was then escorted to the on-site police station for questioning. The incident sparked outrage and drew comparisons to other such instances of children being left at airports and train terminals. In 2018, a couple in Germany forgot their five-year-old daughter at Stuttgart Airport in Berlin. Both the parents claimed that they each had thought the other parent had taken charge of the girl. In May this year, an unattended two-year-old child was swept away on a luggage conveyor belt at New Jersey's Newark Liberty International Airport.
Scroll.in
14 hours ago
- Scroll.in
Kazuo Ishiguro won the Nobel Prize for making us cry. But, ‘Never Let Me Go' should make us angry
Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go was published 20 years ago. Since then, the Japanese-born English writer has been awarded the Nobel Prize in 2017 and knighted for services to literature in 2018. Never Let Me Go has been translated into over 50 languages. It has been adapted into a film, two stage plays, and a ten-part Japanese television series. A critical and commercial success, the novel has been reissued in an anniversary edition with a fresh introduction from the author. A spate of reappraisals has accompanied this anniversary: 'An impossibly sad novel […] it made me cry several times […] sadness spilled off every page.' 'No matter how many times I read it,' one critic wrote, ' Never Let Me Go breaks my heart all over again.' These brief excerpts are clear: the novel pulls us into a morass of sadness that never lets us go. 'I've usually been praised for producing stuff that makes people cry,' Ishiguro has said. 'They gave me a Nobel prize for it.' Strange and familiar I want to reconsider the emotional charge of Never Let Me Go. The deluge of tears attested to by critics hinges on the relationship Ishiguro meticulously crafts between narrator and reader. This is initiated in the novel's first lines. Ishiguro places us in an alternative 1990s England. His opening gambit will be familiar to novel readers: 'My name is Kathy H. I'm thirty-one years old, and I've been a carer now for over eleven years. That sounds long enough, I know, but actually they want me to go on for another eight months […] My donors have always tended to do much better than expected.' Within a few pages, the narration slips into Kathy's recollections of her idyllic 1970s youth at a boarding school called Hailsham. We are immersed in a childhood world of friendship and exclusion, jealousy and love. This is a recognisable world. Ishiguro's first-person narration affords the reader vicarious access to Kathy's interior tangle of emotion, desire and reflection, such that we can recognise something of ourselves in her. Yet something is amiss in her narration. Flat and rather affectless, it is a decidedly less curious, less passionate and more tempered mode of narration than we might expect. The threadbare texture frays the narrative world. What are we to make of the opaque references to 'carer', 'they' and 'donors'? This uncanny tension between the strange and the familiar simmers until a third of the way through the novel, when a 'guardian' at Hailsham reveals the students' futures: 'Your lives are set out for you. You'll become adults, then before you're old, before you're even middle-aged, you'll start to donate your vital organs. That's what each of you was created to do.' Good liberals Kathy is a clone, condemned to death so her organs can be harvested for 'normals'. That this heartless system ' reduces the most hardened critics to tears ' comes as no surprise. After all, Ishiguro has evoked the familiar genre of the 19th-century boarding-school bildungsroman to encourage us to believe that this is a form of subjectivity we can share. This bildung – the German word for 'formation' – is not an integration into society but rather a dismemberment by society. That this does not provoke anger, in readers and characters alike, does come as a surprise. For if the proclamation of the students' fates is not distressing enough, Ishiguro forces us to confront the clones' response or, rather, the lack thereof. There are no incandescent flashes of fury or even mild expressions of dismay. Instead, the clones are 'pretty relieved' when the speech stops. Knowledge of their impending death passes them like a ship in the night, inciting 'surprisingly little discussion'. In this disconcerting silence, the relation between reader and clone is mediated through another genre: science fiction. The bildungsroman and science fiction, identification and misidentification, intimacy and estrangement – these are the tools of Ishiguro's trade. He manipulates them, and us, with precision. There is intimacy as we recognise that the students' everyday lives – reading novels, creating art, playing sport – are much like our own. There is estrangement as we realise that the clones are willingly cooperating in their own deaths. They will 'donate' and 'complete' in the narrative's chilling terms. In other words, we cry because the clones are just like us, but our anger towards the machinery of donation is blunted because the clones are not yet us, in that their complicity eerily lacks our instinct for self-preservation. Confident that we will take ourselves as the measuring stick, Ishiguro compels us to adopt a position of superiority characterised by a paternalistic ethos of sympathy and care. In this way, he persuades us to read as good liberals. We acknowledge the humanity of the clones and embrace the diversity of our common condition. At the same time, we are complacent in the knowledge that we are almost the same, but not quite. We are insulated by a disavowed difference. An abstract formal equality, evacuated of concrete historical content, is precisely what is expressed when the same critics who praise the novel's melancholic tone claim that Ishiguro shows us ' what it is to be human ' or that he enlivens this otherwise ' meaningless cliche '. Beyond liberal sentiments Is Ishiguro doing anything more than offering a banal endorsement of common humanity? It seems to me that he is, and in doing so, he is summoning our liberal sentiments only to turn them against us. The mechanism he uses is as old as the novel form itself: the romance plot. Romance leads to the happily-ever-after of marriage: a perfect union in which each person completes the other. Not long after we learn that Kathy and her friends are clones destined to die, we become privy to a rumour: students who can prove they are 'properly in love' are eligible for a 'deferral' of their donations. To fast-forward through the novel's tangled romance plot to the denouement, Kathy and Tommy – a fellow clone – track down Hailsham's former administrator to plead their case. Not only is their request for deferral rejected, but the possibility of deferral is dispelled as a pernicious rumour. The allure of romance has been a lure, a cold steel trap in the guise of a warm embrace. Ishiguro dangles the promise of romance only to expose its sinister echoes in the donation system. The 'completion' of romance is macabrely inverted. Completion through matrimonial union with an ideal other is transformed into the 'donation' of organs, which completes an unknown 'normal', whose life can continue as a result of the clone's death. Ishiguro positions us so that we are unwittingly aligned with the 'normal' population, whose 'overwhelming concern was that their own children, their spouses, their parents, their friends, did not die from cancer, motor neuron disease, heart disease'. What we want the clones to do (resist their fates) and the means of doing so (romance) are revealed as responsible for the donation system. If we want Kathy and Tommy to live because they love each other – and we do because Ishiguro has compelled us to care for them – then we are endorsing the logic that designates them as disposable in the first place. The anger Ishiguro has deliberately blunted returns, redoubled. Our care is transformed into complicity. We, rather than the clones, are the targets of Ishiguro's ire. Translating this into political terms, Ishiguro is giving aesthetic form to neoliberalism's eclipse of liberalism. It is no coincidence that Never Let Me Go takes place in England between the 1970s and 1990s, the exact period of neoliberalism's emergence and consolidation. But this is no simple transition. Never Let Me Go implies that liberalism is the ghost in the neoliberal machine. The novel is a representation of a vicious neoliberal class system, where those who can afford replacement parts can substantiate the fantasy of liberal individualism, while those who can't serve as replacement parts. In this sense, Ishiguro can be read as posing a series of incisive questions, not simply offering the platitude that we are all human. What are the costs of love? Why is there a trade-off between caring for those close to us and caring for those who are distant? How do our claims of shared humanity pave the way for domination? Why do we assume that our way of life is superior because it is predicated on liberal principles? How do we break from a callous system in which we too are complicit? Twenty years on, these questions are as relevant as ever. To begin answering them, perhaps we have to wipe the tears from our eyes and turn to anger. Matthew Taft is Course Coordinator in English and Theatre Studies, The University of Melbourne. This article first appeared on The Conversation.
NDTV
15 hours ago
- NDTV
RJ Mahvash Buys Cricket Team In This League, Captain Is Ex-IPL Star
The auction for the inaugural CLT10 (Cricket League T10), a three-day tennis ball cricket tournament, took place in Delhi recently. Notable TV personalities like Sunny Leone and Prince Narula were present at the auction, having invested in teams. Influencer RJ Mahvash, who has been linked with Indian cricketer Yuzvendra Chahal, also acquired a team at the auction. Mahvash entered the cricket ownership business as she bought the Supreme Strikers team, which will be led by former Australia opener Shaun Marsh. Mahvash was seen sporting a cream-coloured matching top and skirt set at the event. She also took to Instagram to share some sneak peeks from the auction, highlighting her commitment to her new role as a team owner. "Team RJ Mahvash locked with Captain Shaun Marsh," Mahvash captioned a post on Instagram. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Mahvash (@ Recently, Chahal, during a chat on Raj Shamani's podcast, was asked if anything is going on with Mahvash or anyone else. To which, the cricketer replied, "No, there's nothing. People can think whatever they want to think." "For the first time, when I was seen with someone, people started linking us right away. Even though she clarified it, it was very hard for her. She was called a homewrecker... people said really nasty things. I felt terrible... We could not step out together," he added Talking about their pictures from a Christmas dinner, Yuzvendra stated that it was blown out of proportion. "We had a Christmas dinner with five people, but the photo was cropped to make it look like just the two of us were on a dinner date. It got to a point where we couldn't even go out with friends without worrying about what people would say," he said. Though Chahal hasn't represented India since August 2023, he continues to be active in domestic cricket and the IPL. Chahal's latest competitive matches were for Northamptonshire in the County Championship, where he picked up four wickets against Kent in the first innings but went wicketless in the second. He had a similar outcome against Middlesex. In IPL 2025, Chahal played an important role for the Punjab Kings, claiming 16 wickets in 14 matches at an average of 26.87.
